fbpx

Some people think that people should be given the right to use fresh water as they like. Others believe governments should strictly control the use of fresh water. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Some people think that people should be given the right to use fresh water as they like. Others believe governments should strictly control the use of fresh water. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

It is sometimes asserted that it is advisable that fresh water usage is unlimitedly for everyone, whereas opponents believe it should be under the strict control of the government. In this essay, I will elaborate on both sides of the argument and the reason why I lean toward the former opinion.

On the one hand, the primary reason people should be allowed to use as much water as they like lies on human rights. Specifically, according to UN’s International Covenant on Economic, social and Cultural Rights, accessing freshwater comfortably is recognized as human rights, which enables individuals to meet the fundamental needs in their daily life. For example, people are entitled to use a large amount of water for bathing, washing, cleaning, sanitation or cooking. Therefore, restricting the amount of freshwater is not only an infringement on human rights, but also leading to various difficulties in people's lives, deteriorating their overall quality of life.

On the other hand, the foremost rationale why the government should impose stringent regulations to impede residents from using water extravagantly is the shrinking source of water. This is because there are a wide range of factors including population explosion and climate change-induced disruption like drought, global-warming causing the shrinking source of freshwater, leading to the scarcity of water. As a result, these far-reaching consequences exacerbate the challenges of using water infinitely, leading to the majority of the world population probably residing in water-stressed regions in upcoming years (according to the UN's estimation). Thus, these problems need government interference with more strict regulations and policies to ensure that the supply of water is still long-term.
Personally, while abundance of water usage plays an important role in people’s daily lives, insufficient regulations for protecting sources of water can pose potential risks of water depletion. Consequently, the most ideal approach would be to integrate using water with comfort within global policies to prevent water exhaustion.

In conclusion, both perspectives have their own validity. From my point of view, I believe that although it is a basic human necessity to access fresh water, the government is still responsible for alleviating the negative impacts of environmental issues and the growing population.


Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

  1. "It is sometimes asserted that it is advisable that fresh water usage is unlimitedly for everyone" -> "It is sometimes argued that unlimited access to fresh water for everyone is advisable"
    Explanation: The original phrase is awkwardly constructed and grammatically incorrect. The revised version clarifies the meaning and adheres to formal academic style by using "argued" instead of "asserted" and correcting the grammatical structure.

  2. "the primary reason people should be allowed to use as much water as they like lies on human rights" -> "the primary reason people should be allowed to use as much water as they like is rooted in human rights"
    Explanation: The original phrase "lies on" is incorrect; "is rooted in" is the correct prepositional phrase for indicating a basis or foundation, which is more appropriate for formal writing.

  3. "accessing freshwater comfortably" -> "access to freshwater"
    Explanation: "Accessing freshwater comfortably" is redundant and informal. "Access to freshwater" is a more concise and formal expression.

  4. "people are entitled to use a large amount of water" -> "individuals are entitled to use substantial amounts of water"
    Explanation: "Individuals" is a more formal term than "people," and "substantial amounts" is more precise than "a large amount," which is vague.

  5. "restricting the amount of freshwater is not only an infringement on human rights, but also leading to various difficulties" -> "restricting the amount of freshwater not only infringes on human rights but also leads to various difficulties"
    Explanation: The original phrase is awkwardly constructed. The revised version corrects the grammatical structure and uses "infringes" and "leads" for a more formal tone.

  6. "the foremost rationale why the government should impose stringent regulations" -> "the primary rationale for the government to impose stringent regulations"
    Explanation: "The foremost rationale why" is awkward and informal. "The primary rationale for" is more formal and grammatically correct.

  7. "impede residents from using water extravagantly" -> "prevent residents from using water excessively"
    Explanation: "Impede" is less commonly used in this context and can be vague. "Prevent" is clearer and more direct, and "excessively" is a more precise term than "extravagantly" in this context.

  8. "global-warming causing the shrinking source of freshwater" -> "global warming causing a reduction in freshwater sources"
    Explanation: "Global-warming" is not a standard term; "global warming" is the correct term. Also, "shrinking source of freshwater" is vague; "reduction in freshwater sources" is more specific and formal.

  9. "the majority of the world population probably residing in water-stressed regions" -> "a significant proportion of the global population likely residing in water-stressed regions"
    Explanation: "The majority of the world population" is too absolute and informal. "A significant proportion of the global population" is more precise and formal, and "likely" is more appropriate than "probably" in academic writing.

  10. "the most ideal approach would be to integrate using water with comfort" -> "the most effective approach would be to balance water usage with comfort"
    Explanation: "Integrate using water with comfort" is awkward and unclear. "Balance water usage with comfort" is clearer and more appropriate for formal writing.

  11. "the government is still responsible for alleviating the negative impacts of environmental issues and the growing population" -> "the government remains responsible for mitigating the adverse effects of environmental issues and population growth"
    Explanation: "Alleviating" is less specific than "mitigating," which is more commonly used in formal discussions of environmental and population issues. "Population growth" is more precise than "the growing population."

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

  • Answer All Parts of the Question:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding the use of fresh water. The first body paragraph presents the viewpoint that individuals should have the right to use fresh water freely, citing human rights as a foundational argument. The second body paragraph discusses the opposing view, emphasizing the need for government regulation due to water scarcity caused by population growth and climate change. The essay concludes with a personal opinion that seeks a balance between individual rights and government control, which aligns well with the prompt’s requirement to discuss both views and provide a personal stance.
    • How to improve: To enhance the response further, the writer could provide more specific examples or statistics to support each viewpoint. For instance, mentioning specific countries that have successfully implemented water regulations or those experiencing severe water shortages could strengthen the arguments. Additionally, a clearer distinction between the two perspectives in the introduction could help set the stage for the discussion.
  • Present a Clear Position Throughout:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that leans towards the idea of unrestricted water usage while acknowledging the necessity of government intervention. The writer articulates their opinion in the conclusion, reinforcing their stance. However, the transition from discussing both views to presenting a personal opinion could be more explicit to enhance clarity.
    • How to improve: To improve clarity, the writer could explicitly state their position earlier in the essay, perhaps in the introduction. Phrases like "I believe" or "In my opinion" can be strategically placed to signal the writer’s stance more clearly throughout the essay. Additionally, using transitional phrases when shifting from one viewpoint to another can help maintain coherence.
  • Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay presents and supports ideas well, particularly in the discussion of human rights and the environmental implications of water usage. The use of the UN’s International Covenant as a reference adds credibility to the argument for personal water usage rights. However, the second perspective could benefit from more depth, particularly in discussing the consequences of unregulated water use.
    • How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the writer could elaborate on the consequences of unrestricted water use, such as specific environmental impacts or social issues that arise from water scarcity. Including more examples or case studies would provide a stronger foundation for the arguments presented.
  • Stay on Topic:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic throughout, discussing both perspectives on fresh water usage and the implications of each viewpoint. The writer does not deviate from the main question, which is commendable. However, some sentences could be more concise to avoid potential ambiguity.
    • How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each sentence directly contributes to the argument being made. Avoiding overly complex sentence structures can help clarify the points being made. Additionally, summarizing key points at the end of each paragraph could reinforce the topic’s relevance and ensure that the reader remains engaged with the main argument.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the task requirements, effectively discusses both sides of the argument, and presents a clear personal opinion. With some refinements in the areas of supporting evidence, clarity of position, and conciseness, it could achieve an even higher score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

  • Organize Information Logically:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, with an introduction that outlines the two opposing views and a personal opinion. Each paragraph addresses a specific viewpoint, which helps in organizing the information logically. For instance, the first body paragraph discusses the argument for unlimited water usage based on human rights, while the second body paragraph presents the counterargument regarding the necessity of government control due to water scarcity. However, the transition between the two viewpoints could be smoother, as the shift from discussing human rights to environmental concerns feels somewhat abrupt.
    • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases or sentences at the beginning or end of paragraphs to connect ideas more explicitly. For example, after discussing human rights, a sentence like "However, this perspective must be balanced with the pressing environmental challenges we face today" could help bridge the two arguments more effectively.
  • Use Paragraphs:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which aids readability. Each paragraph has a clear focus, with the first addressing the right to use water freely and the second discussing the need for government regulation. The conclusion succinctly summarizes the arguments and presents a personal stance. However, the paragraphs could be better developed; some points, particularly in the second body paragraph, could benefit from further elaboration or examples to strengthen the argument.
    • How to improve: To improve paragraph effectiveness, ensure that each paragraph contains a topic sentence that clearly states the main idea. Additionally, consider expanding on key points with more examples or explanations. For instance, in the second paragraph, elaborating on specific government policies that could mitigate water scarcity would provide a more robust argument.
  • Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable use of cohesive devices, such as "on the one hand" and "on the other hand," which effectively signal contrasting viewpoints. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between ideas could be strengthened. For example, the phrase "as a result" is used, but there are few other linking words or phrases that could enhance the flow of ideas.
    • How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking phrases and words. For instance, use "furthermore," "in addition," or "consequently" to connect ideas more fluidly. Additionally, consider using pronouns or synonyms to avoid repetition and create a smoother narrative. For example, instead of repeating "freshwater," you might use "this resource" or "it" in subsequent mentions.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, enhancing logical transitions, developing paragraphs further, and diversifying cohesive devices will contribute to a higher band score in Coherence and Cohesion.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

  • Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, utilizing terms like "infringement," "extravagantly," "scarcity," and "alleviating." These words contribute to the clarity and sophistication of the argument. However, there are instances where more varied synonyms could enhance the essay further. For example, the phrase "fresh water usage" is repeated; using alternatives like "water consumption" or "water utilization" could diversify the vocabulary.
    • How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader array of synonyms and phrases throughout the essay. Keeping a thesaurus handy while drafting can help identify opportunities to replace repetitive terms with more varied vocabulary.
  • Use Vocabulary Precisely:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments of imprecision. For instance, the phrase "leading to the majority of the world population probably residing in water-stressed regions" could be more assertively stated. The word "probably" introduces uncertainty that undermines the argument’s strength. Additionally, "under the strict control of the government" could be more effectively expressed as "subject to stringent government regulations."
    • How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on eliminating vague qualifiers like "probably" and instead use definitive language that strengthens the argument. Practicing the use of assertive language in writing can help in this regard.
  • Use Correct Spelling:

    • Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is largely accurate, with only minor errors present. For example, "UN’s International Covenant on Economic, social and Cultural Rights" has inconsistent capitalization; "social" and "Cultural" should be consistently capitalized or not, depending on the style guide being followed. Additionally, "global-warming causing the shrinking source of freshwater" could be clearer if rephrased to avoid confusion about whether "global warming" is a noun or an adjective.
    • How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, focusing on capitalization and punctuation rules. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay aloud can also help catch errors that might be overlooked during the writing process.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of vocabulary, but there is room for improvement in variety, precision, and spelling consistency. By focusing on these areas, the writer can elevate their lexical resource score in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

  • Use a Wide Range of Structures:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of sentence structures, including complex sentences and varied clauses. For instance, the use of phrases like "It is sometimes asserted that" and "the foremost rationale why" showcases an ability to employ different introductory structures. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and redundancy, such as "the shrinking source of water" and "the majority of the world population probably residing in water-stressed regions," which could be streamlined for clarity and impact.
    • How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more compound-complex sentences and use a greater range of conjunctions and transition phrases. For example, instead of repeatedly using "the reason why," alternatives such as "one justification for" or "a key argument is" could be employed. Additionally, varying the placement of clauses (e.g., starting with a dependent clause) could add sophistication to the writing.
  • Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy, but there are notable errors that detract from the overall effectiveness. For example, "unlimitedly for everyone" is awkwardly phrased and could be better expressed as "unlimited access to fresh water." Additionally, punctuation errors, such as missing commas in complex sentences (e.g., before "which enables individuals"), can lead to confusion and disrupt the flow of ideas.
    • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on refining sentence construction and ensuring that punctuation is used correctly. Regular practice with complex sentences and reviewing punctuation rules, particularly for clauses and lists, will be beneficial. Furthermore, proofreading for clarity and conciseness can help eliminate awkward phrases and ensure that the intended meaning is conveyed effectively.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of grammatical range and accuracy, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical and punctuation accuracy will enhance the overall quality of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is sometimes asserted that it is advisable for fresh water usage to be unlimited for everyone, whereas opponents believe it should be under the strict control of the government. In this essay, I will elaborate on both sides of the argument and the reason why I lean toward the former opinion.

On the one hand, the primary reason people should be allowed to use as much water as they like is rooted in human rights. Specifically, according to the UN’s International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, access to freshwater comfortably is recognized as a human right, which enables individuals to meet their fundamental needs in daily life. For example, people are entitled to use a large amount of water for bathing, washing, cleaning, sanitation, or cooking. Therefore, restricting the amount of freshwater not only infringes on human rights but also leads to various difficulties in people’s lives, deteriorating their overall quality of life.

On the other hand, the foremost rationale for the government to impose stringent regulations to prevent residents from using water excessively is the shrinking sources of water. This is because there are a wide range of factors, including population explosion and climate change-induced disruptions like drought, with global warming causing a reduction in freshwater sources, leading to water scarcity. As a result, these far-reaching consequences exacerbate the challenges of using water infinitely, with a significant proportion of the global population likely residing in water-stressed regions in the upcoming years (according to the UN’s estimation). Thus, these problems need government interference with stricter regulations and policies to ensure that the supply of water is sustainable in the long term.

Personally, while the abundance of water usage plays an important role in people’s daily lives, insufficient regulations for protecting sources of water can pose potential risks of water depletion. Consequently, the most effective approach would be to balance water usage with comfort within global policies to prevent water exhaustion.

In conclusion, both perspectives have their own validity. From my point of view, I believe that although it is a basic human necessity to access fresh water, the government is still responsible for mitigating the adverse effects of environmental issues and population growth.

Bài viết liên quan

Around the world, many adults are working from home, and more children are beginning to study from home because technology has become cheaper and more accessible. Do you think this is a positive or negative development? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Around the world, many adults are working from home, and more children are beginning to study from home because technology has become cheaper and more…

IELTS Writify

Chấm IELTS Writing Free x GPT

Lưu ý

Sắp bảo trì server

Để đảm bảo tính ổn định của web, web sẽ thực hiện backup dữ liệu hàng ngày từ 3h-3h30 sáng

Rất mong quý thầy cô và học viên thông cảm vì bất tiện này